Of course I’d like more time to study but now that it’s here, I can’t wait for it to be over with. Wish me luck!

I leave for San Francisco on Sept 30. While I’m there I want to check out San Francisco State and meet with someone in the Human Sexuality program.

On the last practice exam:

Quantitative 370 – 9% percentile

Verbal 450 – 40% percentile

This exam:

Quantitative 470 – 22% percentile

Verbal 500 – 55% percentile

I actually struggled more on the reading comprehension this time around. The first essay was virtually impossible for my brain to comprehend. It was something about seismic waves. That’s really all I can tell you.

In math I’m still struggling with some concepts, especially under a time crunch.

Also, my endurance for sitting in front of a computer for 3 hours could use some improvement as well.

I have no time to waste and I’m not going to mess around these next few weeks. I will raise my score by another couple hundred points. Watch me.

I just sat down and reviewed some material in Princeton Review’s “Crash Course for the GRE” and I realize how hard math is for me. Augh. So easy to get discouraged. I can’t let it happen though.

So, I’m going to have some oj, read one more section and try to take the practice exam again. Ahh.

Finish statement of purpose & personal statement.

Email the finished pieces to Jo Reger, Dyanne Tracey, Loretta Mosby, Karen Skomski and Margaret Willard-Traub when requesting recommendations. Be sure to attach recommendation form.

Acquire official transcripts.

Contact Terri Conley and let her know that I am applying to the program. Also contact other professors I am interested in working with.

Try to have the entire application process complete by the end of October, the latest, the first week in November.

Humor the idea of applying to SFSU, Kinsey and UofMN.

“Ads portraying attractive or successful people are effective only if consumers can actually become more attractive or successful by using the advertised product or service.”

Here is my response under simulated time constraints; however, I may have went over by five minutes or so. I’ll work on that later

The speaker asserts that ads featuring attractive, successful people are effective only if  consumers are able to achieve beauty or success by means of the advertised product. I strongly disagree with this statement because there is amble evidence that products still sell even if they fail to meet their claims.

The best example would be the diet industry. There is a plethora of diet plans and tools on the market that guarantee results in unreasonably short periods of time. Despite the failure rate of most diet plans and the evidence that weight loss comes from behavior modification and lifestyle changes, people are still attracted to the quick fix. It is human nature to avoid pain and seek instant gratification so it makes sense that someone would avoid the gym and take a weight loss pill the guarantees overnight results.

The diet industry isn’t the only business that uses images of attractive, successful people to sell their products. Pick up any magazine or turn on the television and it becomes strikingly apparent that marketers and advertisers present consumers with an idealized reality in order to sell products. Virtually everything is sold to consumers this way; vacations, clothing, make-up and even cleaning products. It’s Marketing 101: People will buy products that appeal to subconscious desires. Through the use of imagery, marketers show consumers how their lives will “improve” if they purchase a product.

Furthermore, it is statistically proven that women are the top consumers. Marketers find it easy to sell to women because we live in a society where most women have unrealistic beauty standards and poor body image. Marketer’s tap into women’s insecurities by reinforcing the idea that they are not good enough and that their lives will improve with said product.

Enlightened consumers know that happiness can not be achieved through the consumption of goods. However, even the most enlightened can get caught up in the perpetual cycle as we are bombarded with hundreds of marketing images throughout our day. Marketers knows this and use this it their advantage, perpetuating an endless cycle of desire. Therefore, it is clear that a product does not need to meet it’s claim in order to successfully sell, it just has to be marketed correctly.

-The Princeton Review, Cracking the GRE, pg. 18

Here goes:

Today: Vocabulary building. Flash-card review, analogy and antonym practice online. Read WSJ and other news sites.

Wed, August 19th: Review math strategies in Princeton Review’s Crash Course for the GRE

Thu, August 20th: Review percentages.

Fri, August 21st: Analytical writing.

Sat, August 22nd: Off

Sun, August 23rd: Analytical writing

Mon, August 24th: Practice exam

After practice exams I like to re-evaluate my strong points and weaknesses. No sense in devising a study plan beyond that point.

Crash Course is extremely helpful in other areas, too. Last year I purchased thick Kaplan GRE workbooks which cost over $30. Crash Course cost $10 and  I feel that I’ve gained more testing strategies from this book than I have from Kaplan. Now I’m bummed out that I didn’t buy Princeton Review materials the first time around.

Anyway, here are the two essays I wrote under simulated time constraints. Both examples were taken from Writing Skills and are diagnostic writing exercises.

Writing Task No. 1: Issue Essay ; 45 minute time limit

“Leisure time is becoming an increasingly rare commodity, largely because technology has failed to achieve its goal of improving our efficiency in our daily lives.”

The speaker argues that our leisure time is being negatively impacted by the inefficiency of technology in simplifying our daily lives. What the speaker fails to notice is that technology has in fact made our lives simpler – information, ideas and people are more accessible than ever. The true problem with technology is that we’ve allowed it to consume and infiltrate every area of our lives; in turn, the true culprit of decreased free time is ourselves.

We live in a work-driven society that promotes the use of technology as a means to stay connected. Technology, most notably, the internet, has changed the way Americans conduct business and live their lives. Cell phones have turned into portable computers and many professionals use these powerful devices to stay connected to work even when outside of the office. In turn, the lines of work and play can easily become blurred. Free time decreases as the pursuit of the “American dream” persists.

Even outside of the business realm, average Americans use technology to stay connected to family, friends and even total strangers. With the proliferation of social networking sites, blogs and instant messengers, individuals are spending hours upon hours in front of a computer. While many of these sites bombard us with useless information and advertisements, we use these sites and programs to stay connected to the bigger world. Unfortunately, the use of these technologies becomes compulsive and many people find themselves developing virtually addictive behaviors to these sites and programs.

What it boils down to is that our lack of leisure time can not be blamed on technology’s inefficiency; in fact, it can be argued that our free time is diminishing because of how efficient it actually is. As a society, we’ve allowed technology to permeate our professional and personal lives and our addiction to connection has become all-consuming. Before blaming technology, individuals must power down and begin examining their behavior.

Writing Task No. 2: Argument Essay ; 30 minute time limit

“Last year, the local television-news program In Focus reported in its annual car-and-truck safety survey that over the course of the last ten years, United Motors vehicles were involved in at least 30 percent fewer fatal accidents to drivers than vehicles built by any other single manufacturer. Now United is developing a one-of-a-kind computerized crash warning system for all its trucks. Clearly, anyone concerned with safety who is in the market for a new truck this year should buy a United Motors truck.”

The speaker claims that people who want to purchase safe trucks should consider United Motors because their cars and trucks are built better than their competitors. Unfortunately, the argument given in support of the claim is not logically sound. In fact, the argument ignores certain important assumptions.

First, the argument implies that the computerized crash warning system they’re installing in the new truck models will improve safety. However, this theory can not be known for certain until the trucks hit the road and studies are done. Once studies demonstrate that trucks with computerized crash warning systems are safer, then it would be fair for United Motors to make that claim.

Second, the argument never addresses the dynamics of the ten year study it refers to. The ten year study states that United Motors vehicles were involved in fewer fatal accidents than other manufactured brands. The problem with this statement is that it doesn’t tell the reader whether or not the fatal car accidents were a direct result of poor manufacturing. In fact, most fatal car accidents are caused by drivers, with driving under the influence as the number one cause.

Finally, the speaker doesn’t reveal whether or not consumers of United Motors are part of the demographic prone to fatal car accidents. Statistically, young men, teenagers and elderly individuals cause the most car accidents. Perhaps consumers of the United Motors brand are mostly thirty-something year old mothers, who, according to statistics, cause fewer accidents.

Thus, the argument is not logically sound. The evidence in support of the claim that United Motors vehicles are safer than other manufacturers is insufficient. In order to make this argument stronger the speaker must reveal more information about the ten year study that was used to support the claims and also analyze who United Motors’ key demographic is.

There it is. I am happy with the way that these two essays turned out, especially given the time constraint. The first essay was the most difficult to write because it dealt with a complex philosophical and social issue. The Argument was easier because the main goal was to uncover logical fallacies and underlying assumptions made by the author.

Alas, I still haven’t come up with a study schedule. I know, awful. I keep avoiding it and instead, study whatever I’ve felt like studying that day. Not the best approach. I haven’t been reviewing my flash-cards daily, either. Bad, bad Heather.

Okay. I’ve had enough of my rambling for one day. Haven’t you?